Maybe we can’t handle the truth

Published: Thursday, April 25, 2013 at 4:45 p.m.

Last Modified: Thursday, April 25, 2013 at 4:45 p.m.

Well, which is it?

The Terrebonne Parish school system wants it both ways when it comes to the enormous tax-hike election coming up on May 4.

The system has placed an issue on the ballot saying that it will — if the measure is approved — impose a new 20-mill property tax for the next 10 years. It will also — again, if the tax passes — impose a new 11-mill property tax for the next 20 years.

Superintendent Philip Martin, too, tells this story. On a recent appearance on local cable television, he owned up to the fact that the two new taxes will be imposed differently and that the 11-mill tax could last for the next 20 years.

But the School Board’s website tells a different one entirely.

Ironically, the following still appeared Thursday after the word “FACT”: “The proposed millage has a 10 year sunset.”

Clearly, either the ballot itself or the website is giving out the wrong information. The question is why such a blatantly false statement is appearing either on the ballot or in the School Board’s literature and on its website.

I don’t know, but I don’t like the implications of a government agency actively campaigning for more money and using statements that are, um, less than true to do it.

This is the second time I have mentioned this divergence between the School Board’s words and the truth in this space, and it has been pointed out in an editorial on this page as well, so one would think that unless the statement is purposefully false, it would have been removed or corrected by now.

Altogether, the two new taxes would more than quadruple the property taxes currently paid. It would mean an extra $25 million or so a year to the local schools, much of which will be spent on pay raises for all the employees — a political ploy meant to ensure that the thousands of school workers will support the plan.

With all that extra money, there must be a pretty detailed plan, right? There must be something written down that will tell taxpayers exactly how paying cafeteria workers, bus drivers and office assistants $2,000 more each year will result in better student outcomes. Not so much.

There is a two-page outline on the website that lists things like, “All schools — Renovate/Remodel, interior and exterior” without telling us anything about the actual improvements the taxpayers might expect to see at any given school.

The only concrete part of the plan is the across-the-board raises, the kinds of raises that seem at cross purposes with rewarding the most-deserving employees.

The lack of detail is part of why so many home- and business owners have taken issue with the massive tax scheme.

Another reason has been the school system’s lack of candor. In addition to the 10-year sunset statement, there is also the oft-repeated but still false assertion that Terrebonne residents “pay more to have their garbage collected (11.21 mills) than they do to support public schools.”

As I have previously pointed out, that statements is absurd. Yes, the millage for garbage collection is slightly higher than the millage for schools, but the schools collect a 2.08-cent sales tax that brings in far more money than the property tax does. Together, the two local tax streams dwarf the money spent on garbage. The folks who put up the website where these ridiculous statements still reside knew they were being less than truthful, or they should have known.

Either way, any voter could legitimately wonder why, if the arguments in favor of this colossal tax are so strong, the school system would have to resort to such questionable statements of what it calls “FACT”s.

Any voter might also wonder why the school system has been trying to scare its retirees into voting for the scheme by threatening to charge them more for their insurance coverage if the measure fails. That is simply inexcusable.

When the facts are compelling, they can be used to reinforce an argument. When one has to go outside the facts to make an argument, it is reasonable to ask why.

I have yet to see any suitable explanation.

Editorial Page Editor Michael Gorman can be reached at 448-7612 or by e-mail at mike.gorman@dailycomet.com.

<p>Well, which is it?</p><p>The Terrebonne Parish school system wants it both ways when it comes to the enormous tax-hike election coming up on May 4.</p><p>The system has placed an issue on the ballot saying that it will — if the measure is approved — impose a new 20-mill property tax for the next 10 years. It will also — again, if the tax passes — impose a new 11-mill property tax for the next 20 years.</p><p>Superintendent Philip Martin, too, tells this story. On a recent appearance on local cable television, he owned up to the fact that the two new taxes will be imposed differently and that the 11-mill tax could last for the next 20 years.</p><p>But the School Board's website tells a different one entirely.</p><p>Ironically, the following still appeared Thursday after the word “FACT”: “The proposed millage has a 10 year sunset.”</p><p>Clearly, either the ballot itself or the website is giving out the wrong information. The question is why such a blatantly false statement is appearing either on the ballot or in the School Board's literature and on its website.</p><p>I don't know, but I don't like the implications of a government agency actively campaigning for more money and using statements that are, um, less than true to do it.</p><p>This is the second time I have mentioned this divergence between the School Board's words and the truth in this space, and it has been pointed out in an editorial on this page as well, so one would think that unless the statement is purposefully false, it would have been removed or corrected by now.</p><p>Altogether, the two new taxes would more than quadruple the property taxes currently paid. It would mean an extra $25 million or so a year to the local schools, much of which will be spent on pay raises for all the employees — a political ploy meant to ensure that the thousands of school workers will support the plan.</p><p>With all that extra money, there must be a pretty detailed plan, right? There must be something written down that will tell taxpayers exactly how paying cafeteria workers, bus drivers and office assistants $2,000 more each year will result in better student outcomes. Not so much.</p><p>There is a two-page outline on the website that lists things like, “All schools — Renovate/Remodel, interior and exterior” without telling us anything about the actual improvements the taxpayers might expect to see at any given school.</p><p>The only concrete part of the plan is the across-the-board raises, the kinds of raises that seem at cross purposes with rewarding the most-deserving employees.</p><p>The lack of detail is part of why so many home- and business owners have taken issue with the massive tax scheme.</p><p>Another reason has been the school system's lack of candor. In addition to the 10-year sunset statement, there is also the oft-repeated but still false assertion that Terrebonne residents “pay more to have their garbage collected (11.21 mills) than they do to support public schools.”</p><p>As I have previously pointed out, that statements is absurd. Yes, the millage for garbage collection is slightly higher than the millage for schools, but the schools collect a 2.08-cent sales tax that brings in far more money than the property tax does. Together, the two local tax streams dwarf the money spent on garbage. The folks who put up the website where these ridiculous statements still reside knew they were being less than truthful, or they should have known.</p><p>Either way, any voter could legitimately wonder why, if the arguments in favor of this colossal tax are so strong, the school system would have to resort to such questionable statements of what it calls “FACT”s.</p><p>Any voter might also wonder why the school system has been trying to scare its retirees into voting for the scheme by threatening to charge them more for their insurance coverage if the measure fails. That is simply inexcusable.</p><p>When the facts are compelling, they can be used to reinforce an argument. When one has to go outside the facts to make an argument, it is reasonable to ask why.</p><p>I have yet to see any suitable explanation.</p><p>Editorial Page Editor Michael Gorman can be reached at 448-7612 or by e-mail at mike.gorman@dailycomet.com.</p>